Page 20 - OHS, April 2020

VISION PROTECTION
More than 70 percent of individuals believe that loss of their eyesight would have the greatest impact on their day-to-day life.
(splinters and chips).6
There is a heavy health price to pay for eye injuries, but there’s
a literal price, too. The economic burden (medical and work-loss costs) of all non-fatal injuries treated in emergency departments in 2013 was $456.9 billion.7
Workers experience eye injuries on the job for three major reasons:
■ They were not wearing eye protection.
■ They were wearing the wrong kind of protection for the job.
■ They had an unknown vision disorder which contributed
to the injury (compromise to visual fields or vision-associated balance disorder).
Employer and Employee
Injury Prevention Compliance
According to the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act of 1970, personal protective equipment (PPE), such as goggles, face shields, safety glasses or full-face respirators must be used when an eye hazard exists. The necessary eye protection depends on the type of hazard, the circumstances of exposure, other protective equipment used, and an individual’s vision needs.
Additionally, the employer must provide training to each em- ployee who is required to use PPE. Each such employee shall be trained to know at least the following:
■ When PPE is necessary
■ What PPE is necessary
■ How to properly don, doff, adjust, and wear PPE
■ Limitations of the PPE
■ Proper care, maintenance, useful life and disposal of the PPE PPE should be provided by the employer at no cost to employ-
ees. The employer must pay for replacement PPE, except when the employee has lost or intentionally damaged the PPE.
Employers must also comply with the General Duty Clause of the OSH Act, which requires keeping the workplace free of serious recognized hazards.
A Bureau of Labor Statistics survey of workers who suffered eye injuries revealed that nearly three out of five were not wearing eye protection at the time of the accident.8 “Eye and Face Protection” was among the top 10 most frequently cited violations in 2018.9 Workers often reported that they believed protection was not re- quired for the situation.
Assessing Potential Eye Hazards
Many workers are unaware of the potential hazards in their work environments, making them vulnerable to injury. Employers must recognize the existence of eye hazards. A hazard analysis should begin with an on-site tour and an analysis of all work areas. First- hand information must be obtained about each work area, with in- put from foremen/supervisors and individual workers. The doctor of optometry can consult or assist with this analysis.
Company safety records should be reviewed to identify areas where past eye injuries have occurred. Attention should be paid to:
■ Sources of motion that can create projectiles
■ Employee movement patterns that could result in impact with stationary objects
■ Sources of heat that could cause injury or exposure to infra- red radiation (IR)
■ Chemical exposures (splashes and fumes)
■ Sources of dust
■ Sources of radiation (especially visible light, ultraviolet ra-
diation, heat or IR, and lasers)
■ Pathogens from blood and body fluids (i.e. Hepatitis, HIV,
COVID-19 ((novel coronavirus))10, 11
■ Layout of the workplace
■ Electrical hazards
Some working conditions include multiple eye hazards, so the
proper eye protection should take all hazards into account. In ad- dition, light levels should be evaluated to determine whether light- ing fulfills Illuminating Engineering Society recommendations for each task.12
Once a hazard analysis has been completed and proper protec- tive devices have been selected, re-evaluation at appropriate inter- vals is necessary. The doctor of optometry and plant occupational health safety officer should evaluate new equipment, review acci- dent records, and assess the suitability of previously selected eye protection for every specific task.
Selection of Protective Eyewear
Safety glasses are designed to provide significantly more eye pro- tection than regular eyeglasses. They must meet standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Look for the Z87 mark on prescription lenses and frame, as well as on non-prescrip- tion goggles and face shields.
Contact lenses cannot provide significant protection from eye hazards in the workplace. Nonetheless, there is no evidence that wearing contact lenses increases the risk of eye injury. On the con- trary, contact lenses actually can increase worker safety and pro- ductivity by providing improved vision in the workplace. Individu- als who wear contact lenses usually have a wider field of vision than with eyeglasses. Contact lenses also often cause less visual distor- tion than eyeglasses, especially with higher power lens prescrip- tions. In addition, wearing contact lenses instead of eyeglasses can improve the fit and comfort of non-prescription eye safety equip- ment, such as goggles and full-face respirators.
The American Optometric Association (AOA) believes workers should be permitted to wear contact lenses in most eye-hazardous environments (see the AOA Guidelines for the Use of Contact Lenses in Industrial Environments). However, workers must wear eye protection over contact lenses according to the requirements for all workers performing the same job.
In some cases, such as when hazardous chemical fumes are present, the safety of contact lens use should be determined on a case-by-case basis.
The Maintenance of Employees’ Working Ability and Promotion of Employee Health
Between 8.2 and 15.9 million people in the U.S. live with undiag- nosed or untreated refractive errors.13 Millions more suffer un- corrected and undiagnosed ocular diseases and systemic diseases
16 Occupational Health & Safety | APRIL 2020
www.ohsonline.com